Does anyone pay attention to standards?

[Isaac Grover]

Hi everyone,

Just out of curiosity I recently pointed one of my hand-typed pages at the W3
Validator, and my hand-typed code was just ripped to shreds. Then I pointed
some major sites (microsoft.com, cnn.com, etc.) at the W3 Validator; to my
surprise none of them passed.

Doesn't anyone care anymore, or are the standards more-or-less looked at as
guidlines for web design?

Isaac

Are you losing $14,200.00 per year without your knowledge?
http://bigmoneyandfreetime.web1000.com

[Alan J. Flavell]

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004, Whitecrest wrote:

What drives people to "The Punisher" web site?
(Never heard of it, but no matter...)
It's position in the search engines?
Is it? (SCNR)
Nope, the radio, tv, and print ads send them to the site.
So, now you're saying that they go there because they've seen
advertisements for it?

Previously you said, and I quote:
But keep in mind MANY sites are more concerned with appearance and
presentation, because THAT is what drives people to their site,

Forgive me if I'm slow on the uptake, but I had the distinct
impression there that you were saying that it was the appearance of
the web site itself which "drives people to their site".

Now you're saying that what sends them there is radio, tv and
print advertising. Am I clear now?

People go to the Coke site because they already know the url,

Well spotted. Now tell us again how that "drives people to their
site"?

TV, Radio and print ads.

Right. Not the design of the web site. Got it.

Thanks.

[Brendan Taylor]

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 16:41:01 -0400, Whitecrest wrote:

In article <pa************ *************** *@lionsanctuary .net>,
an******@lionsa nctuary.net says...

> And if I disagree with them?

Publish your own. Convince others to use it. Provide tools and support
for your standard. Document how and why it's better than the existing
standards.

Or only use the pieces I want to make it work the way I want it to,
which is what 99% of the entire web does right now.

Which is most certainly not a good thing.
If browsers supported standards as they were supposed to, it would make
everybody's life easier.
The only way to encourage browsers to change is to do HTML properly.
Besides, even with IE being horribly wrong about everything coding to
standards isn't a great deal of effort - easier than not, I would say.

[spaghetti]

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 07:06:19 GMT, Isaac Grover <ep*****@myexce l.com> wrote:

Doesn't anyone care anymore, or are the standards more-or-less looked at
as guidlines for web design?

Why do I pay attention to standards? I'm on dial-up, and have respect for
other dial-up users.

I know people who consider dial-up users the minority when in fact we are
MAJORITY. It reminds me a few years back when programmers weren't so
concerned about "code bloat" because computers were continually getting
better and bigger, so the time spent streamlining code didn't seem worth
it. Then along came handheld devices, where streamlined code was
mandatory...

People think spending time developing for dial-up doesn't matter because
more and more people are getting broadband everyday. But then comes along
the WIRELESS handheld devices... :P

Standards don't entirely solve the bandwidth problem, but they are
three-fourths of the solution. And pages developed with standards almost
always still work for me even if I choose to turn off graphics or sync the
page to my handheld.

--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

[Stan McCann]

Toby A Inkster wrote:

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 10:42:05 -0600, Stan McCann wrote:

You and I don't set the standards.

I do. This page:

http://www.goddamn.co.uk/help/textsize/

uses my very own HTML standard (based on HTML 4.01 Strict).

If you are the only one using it, it's not a standard.

--
Stan McCann
Tularosa Basin chapter ABATE of NM Cooordinator, Alamogordo, NM
'94 1500 Vulcan (now wrecked) :(
http://surecann.com/Dcp_2068c.jpg

[Stan McCann]

Whitecrest wrote:

In article <40********@new s.zianet.com>, st**@surecann.c om says...

The problem with standards on something as diverse as the web is I might
not like your choice of standards, and you might not like mine.

You and I don't set the standards. We should agree on a set used all
over; there is *one* BTW. Ever hear of W3C?

And if I disagree with them?

That's entirely your choice. Your code is not standard.

--
Stan McCann
Tularosa Basin chapter ABATE of NM Cooordinator, Alamogordo, NM
'94 1500 Vulcan (now wrecked) :(
http://surecann.com/Dcp_2068c.jpg

[goodhart]

"spaghetti" <sp*******@aspy re.net> wrote in message
news:opr6xw80b6 0ipbra@alice...

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 07:06:19 GMT, Isaac Grover <ep*****@myexce l.com> wrote:

Doesn't anyone care anymore, or are the standards more-or-less looked at
as guidlines for web design?

Why do I pay attention to standards? I'm on dial-up, and have respect for
other dial-up users.

I know people who consider dial-up users the minority when in fact we are
MAJORITY. It reminds me a few years back when programmers weren't so
concerned about "code bloat" because computers were continually getting
better and bigger, so the time spent streamlining code didn't seem worth
it. Then along came handheld devices, where streamlined code was
mandatory...

I completely agree, I am also A dialup user and Not likely to have the
option of broadband for
many years to come, not due to price but due to living in a remote area with
no access (I don't even get
mobile reception) Just under %90 of Australian Internet users are on dialup
and pages with lots
of non standard bloat make for a very unpleasant and fustrating surfing
experience.

I design pages for Australian business with Australian customers who need
standard complient fast loading
pages to make a good impression.

Trusylver

[James Pickering]

Stan McCann st**@surecann.c om wrote:

<snip>You and I don't set the standards. We should agree on a set used all
over; there is *one* BTW. Ever hear of W3C?<snip>

Actually the W3C only publishes recommendations . The only Internationally
recognized standards are promulgated by the ISO. In the case of HTML ..........

http://www.cs.tcd.ie/15445/15445.html

James Pickering

[James Pickering]

Brian us*****@julietr emblay.com.invalid wrote:

Adrienne wrote:

In my experience, clean markup, clean CSS and clean code
leads to better results in search engines.

My recently loaded Practical Italic Handwriting page .....

http://www.jp29.org/cadr.htm

...... currently occupies the top four returns out of 1,960 in a Google search
for "Practical Italic Handwriting" and fifth place out of 182,000 for a Google
search for "Italic writing".

James Pickering
Pickering Pages
http://www.jp29.org/

[Stan McCann]

James Pickering wrote:

Stan McCann st**@surecann.c om wrote:

<snip>You and I don't set the standards. We should agree on a set used all
over; there is *one* BTW. Ever hear of W3C?<snip>

Actually the W3C only publishes recommendations . The only Internationally
recognized standards are promulgated by the ISO. In the case of HTML ..........

http://www.cs.tcd.ie/15445/15445.html

Interesting point; as well as true. But, in my opinion, it's semantics.
Much of what is in the "standard" refer to the "recommendation ." IMO,
they are, for all practical purposes, the same thing. The
recommendations are much easier to read and understand.

--
Stan McCann
Tularosa Basin chapter ABATE of NM Cooordinator, Alamogordo, NM
'94 1500 Vulcan (now wrecked) :(
http://surecann.com/Dcp_2068c.jpg

[Alan J. Flavell]

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004, Stan McCann wrote:

Toby A Inkster wrote:

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 10:42:05 -0600, Stan McCann wrote:

You and I don't set the standards.

I do. This page:

http://www.goddamn.co.uk/help/textsize/

uses my very own HTML standard (based on HTML 4.01 Strict).

If you are the only one using it, it's not a standard.

SGML is an ISO standard. HTML is a W3C recommendation. XHTML is a
W3C trademarked product. Hence or otherwise deduce which are
literally standards.

However, the cited document isn't useful in SGML terms without some
way for users to get a copy of the author's MyHTML4 DTD.